Journal of vascular surgery · 2013
Clinical significance of type II endoleaks after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bischoff Moritz S, Geisbüsch Philipp, Kotelis Drosos, Müller-Eschner Matthias, Hyhlik-Dürr Alexander, Böckler Dittmar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the clinical significance of type II endoleaks (ELII) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).
METHODS: From January 1997 to June 2012, a total of 344 patients received TEVAR in our institution. ELII was diagnosed in 30 patients (8.7%; 13 males; median age: 65 years, range: 24 to 84 years), representing the study population of this retrospective, single-center analysis. Mean follow-up was 29.5 months (range, 8 months to 9.5 years).
RESULTS: Primary ELII was observed in all but two cases (28/30; 93.3%). The most common sources of ELII were the left subclavian artery (LSA; 13/30; 43.3%) and intercostal/bronchial vessels (13/30; 43.3%), followed by visceral arteries (4/30; 13.4%). Overall mortality was 33.3% (10/30). ELII-related death (secondary rupture) was observed in 20% (2/10). Reintervention (RI) procedures for ELII were performed in 9 of 30 patients (30.0%); 5 of 9 (55.6%) in cases with ELII via the LSA. Indications for RI were diameter expansion in five and extensive leakage in four cases. Treatment was successful in five patients (55.6%) but failed in four cases (44.4%). In 12 of 21 (57.1%) untreated patients, ELII sealed during follow-up. In conservatively treated patients, an increase in aortic diameter has been only observed in a patient with secondary ELII.
CONCLUSIONS: The results presented herein suggest that the clinical impact of ELII after TEVAR must not be underestimated. Albeit a transient finding in most cases, ELII is associated with a relevant RI rate, particularly in cases involving the LSA. RI seems indicated in patients with increasing aortic diameter and/or extensive leakage. Careful surveillance of all patients with ELII is recommended.
METHODS: From January 1997 to June 2012, a total of 344 patients received TEVAR in our institution. ELII was diagnosed in 30 patients (8.7%; 13 males; median age: 65 years, range: 24 to 84 years), representing the study population of this retrospective, single-center analysis. Mean follow-up was 29.5 months (range, 8 months to 9.5 years).
RESULTS: Primary ELII was observed in all but two cases (28/30; 93.3%). The most common sources of ELII were the left subclavian artery (LSA; 13/30; 43.3%) and intercostal/bronchial vessels (13/30; 43.3%), followed by visceral arteries (4/30; 13.4%). Overall mortality was 33.3% (10/30). ELII-related death (secondary rupture) was observed in 20% (2/10). Reintervention (RI) procedures for ELII were performed in 9 of 30 patients (30.0%); 5 of 9 (55.6%) in cases with ELII via the LSA. Indications for RI were diameter expansion in five and extensive leakage in four cases. Treatment was successful in five patients (55.6%) but failed in four cases (44.4%). In 12 of 21 (57.1%) untreated patients, ELII sealed during follow-up. In conservatively treated patients, an increase in aortic diameter has been only observed in a patient with secondary ELII.
CONCLUSIONS: The results presented herein suggest that the clinical impact of ELII after TEVAR must not be underestimated. Albeit a transient finding in most cases, ELII is associated with a relevant RI rate, particularly in cases involving the LSA. RI seems indicated in patients with increasing aortic diameter and/or extensive leakage. Careful surveillance of all patients with ELII is recommended.